Case Citator › Estelle v. McGuire

Estelle v. McGuire

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Limited by some courts
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
502 U.S. 62
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
520 of 520
Citing cases (total)
8,687
Treatment dates
2003
Limited by some courts
At least one reviewed court has limited this case’s holding to narrower facts or a narrower rule. No reviewed court has overruled it. Estelle v. McGuire remains controlling, but the Eighth Circuit recognized a narrow exception to its usual bar on reexamining state-law evidentiary rulings. In Lannert v. Jones, the court addressed a state evidentiary ruling because it was intertwined with a self-defense claim.
More on how this was screened

This limited treatment is listed below. All 520 flagged citations have been read; the other opinions did not adversely treat McGuire.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

8,687 later cases cite Estelle v. McGuire; 520 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Estelle v. McGuire?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Limited

  • The Eighth Circuit addressed a state-law evidentiary ruling despite Estelle's usual bar because the issue was interrelated with a self-defense claim.

    Lannert v. Jones · Eighth Circuit · filed

    We ordinarily would not reach this issue, as “it is not the province of a federal habeas court to reexamine state-court determinations on state-law questions.” Estelle, 502 U.S. at 67-68, 112 S.Ct. 475. However, because Lannert’s battered spouse syndrome claim is interrelated with her self-defense claim, we will address her arguments regarding the evi-dentiary ruling.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Estelle v. McGuire and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace